Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Who Owns Stock in Pearson?

The question, reported by the New York Daily News, referred to a story similar to the famous Aesop fable about the tortoise and the hare, but in this version, a talking pineapple challenges a hare to race. The rabbit wins, not surprisingly, as the fruit can’t actually move, and other animals, who have wagered on the winner, eat the pineapple, according to the paper. Students were asked some perplexing questions:

Why did the animals eat the talking fruit, and which animal was wisest? "

And someone actually paid a lot of money to have this test developed and administered? I think that demonstrates how utterly stupid the premise of "standardized" testing actually is. Just what qualifies Pearson as an authority on education? And who owns stock in the firm?

When I was in eigth grade we had to pass a "constitution" test to graduate and go on to high school. Somehow I think that's been more valuable to my life experience than wondering why the pineapple was eaten. It's pretty obvious the other animals were simply hedging their bet. Interestingly I wonder why they were even worried about the outcome since obviously the pineapple was immobile to begin with. Either they were hungry and liked the taste of pineapple or they were totally clueless and perverted. Much like today's Wall St.. Since the pineapple is not an animal it's not to be included in the last part of the question, and the other animals aren't identified....there can only be one winner: the hare.

Parental rights are broadly protected by Supreme Court decisions (Meyer and Pierce), especially in the area of education, so why not in our state statutes? The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that parents posses the “fundamental right” to “direct the upbringing and education of their children.” Furthermore, the Court declared that “the child is not the mere creature of the State: those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right coupled with the high duty to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.” (Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, 534-35) The Supreme Court criticized a state legislature for trying to interfere “with the power of parents to control the education of their own.” (Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 402.) In Meyer, the Supreme Court held that the right of parents to raise their children free from unreasonable state interferences is one of the unwritten "liberties" protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. (262 U.S. 399)

In recognition of both the right and responsibility of parents to control their children’s education, the Court has stated,

“It is cardinal with us that the custody, care and nurture of the child reside first in the parents, whose primary function and freedom include preparation for the obligations the State can neither supply nor hinder.” (Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158)